Sho_Nuff82
Member
Jocchan said:
I'm really looking forward to seeing if this holds true at all once Sony starts allowing devs to patch wand controls into their games.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NPD Sales Results for December 2009
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
I'm really looking forward to seeing if this holds true at all once Sony starts allowing devs to patch wand controls into their games.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
C4Lukins said:
I would never rigidly assign a definitive cycle to anything in the game industry. However, I assert that those comparing Halo to Mario, at least in this point in the Halo franchises life would be wrong to do so, especially given your example.
In my example I pointed directly to the mainline Halo franchise itself, so let's focus on that for a second. Halo on the XBOX, (like Mario on the NES) really did not have any stiff competition in its genre; FPS. Now, the FPS is the focal point of game development, design, implementation, and popularity. Just as Halo was a big fish in a small pond on the XBOX, it has to deal with a myriad of competition for the same dollars on the 360. That, in addition to its semi-frequent releases, are diminishing its value.
The example you gave, Mario Party, doesn't at all fit within the cycle i'm referring. Mario Party's only association with the Mario platformer is the mascot that appears in them. Mario Party was never going to siphon dollars from Mario 64, or Crash Bandicoot, or Spyro, or other games in the same genre that are competing for the same dollars. Similarly, Halo Wars has little to fear from Modern Warfare as far as its product cycle is concerned.
As for the Mario platformer games themselves, a few things have happened with the series, as well as the genre. First, Mario releases thinned out. It is only now in this Wii generation that we're even seeing more than one Mario platform game release in a generation, whereas on the NES they were far more frequent. Additionally, platformers are no longer the monster genre they were in the 16 bit days, and much of the competition Mario games had say on the SNES and N64 has thinned out. For many, NSMBW and Galaxy are either the only choice or the cream of a very slim crop of games within the genre to pick. The Mario platformer games on the Wii and DS are seeing a rejuvenated product cycle as a result.
Halo, on the other hand, cannot be afforded that luxury. FPS is the master genre of this generation, and as such the competitors for time and attention are thick. Beyond that, as it stands now, Halo isn't even the most popular game IN this genre right now, whereas before it was the definitive title.
This is why I said it would be wise of Microsoft to slow the releases, particularly if it wants Halo to continue to be a marquee franchise beyond this generation. Please understand, by none of this do I mean that Halo will stop selling or that the franchise will die and the Earth will be salted from its presence. However if Microsoft truly intends to maintain Halo as the monster franchise it is, it would do well to not over saturate its userbase with the game lest they grow weary and switch to something else, as is the case with any product at the end of its maturity stages.
ShockingAlberto said:
heh I see what you mean...
What I meant is that the fact that games like Monster Hunter 3 and SSBB are loved here contradicts what people say about having unique experiences on the Wii and wanting motion controls and all.
Most (I stress, most) people who keep 'banging that drum' in this forum don't really want games with motion controls, and those 2 games are proof of that. They just want high-profile games on the Wii, because that's the system they have or the system they 'support' for whatever reason, and that's just dumb.
And just like Sho_Nuff82, i'm eager to see how much passion people will have for motion controls and innovative input methods when the Sony Wand and Natal arrive.
I, for one, really hope they do but I'm not holding my breath, especially for older titles.Sho_Nuff82 said:
After the Wii remote unveiling, I was extremely excited for the possibilities it could have brought into gaming even for traditional genres and started writing down concept after concept for a certain company. Some of them stayed short descriptions, some of them became early design docs, none of them were actually used anywhere (even though I found some of those ideas in completely unrelated titles, with Silent Hill Shattered Memories being probably the most blatant example: one of my concepts was meant to be used for a new horror IP with
IR-controlled flashlight, nightmare sequences where the player was supposed to run away from the monsters and use the controller to interact with the environment and slow them down/stop them, and wake sequences where the player had no monsters to face and was supposed to investigate about what was going on... the resemblance is pretty creepy if you ask me
Now I find the Wii software library, besides Nintendo games and occasional surprises by third parties, very disappointing and I stopped hoping third parties would step in and turn motion controls' and IR aiming's untapped potential for traditional games - especially the ones Nintendo doesn't make - into reality. It won't happen until the next generation hits or, if Natal and the Wands find any success, we may start getting some interesting glimpses pretty soon.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
DeaconKnowledge said:
Deacon, the mistake that you're making is that you seem to be implying that CoD (and other competing shooter franchises) popularity has come at the expense of Halo.
In actuality, because of the online focus of the platform, and its large increase in popularity over the original Xbox, the number of shooter fans in general, and Halo fans specifically, is still increasing every month. Comparing the situation to 2001 is difficult because there are more console online gamers now than there have ever been, and there will be 5-10 million more next year when Halo: Reach releases. For many new owners, Halo 3 and MW2 are going to be their first online shooters ever. No franchise fatigue for them.
Halo 3 was the number one online title on 360 in 2007, 2008, and 2009. Even with the monster CoD series peaking over its shoulder. Unlike the CoD userbase, which has been asked to switch over to a new title with new mechanics and new rankings every year, Reach will be the first time Bungie/MS has asked their fanbase to make any kind of leap at all in 3 years (even if you include ODST, which just had more maps for Halo 3 MP).
If MS turns around and releases Halo 5 in 2011 with all new multiplayer (instead of map packs/expansions for Reach), then I would admit that they're beginning to milk it.
Until that happens though, I don't think we can easily dismiss a franchise with 4 mainline releases in 9 years as saturated.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
BishopLamont said:
Wasn't the first GTA on PSP sold before the Pandora battery was leaked? Once that happened, it was all downhill for PSP games.
There was piracy on the PSP long before the Pandora.OldJadedGamer said:
Why didn't I buy GTA: CW on the DS or PSP even though I own all of the PS2 ones as well as GTAIV? Top-down display. I'll probably get it eventually but not unless I find it for really cheap.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Fuzzy said:
Sure piracy was there... but wasn't as crazy rampant or as simple as it was once the Pandora battery hit. That release blew the doors off CW for the PSP. The Pandora battery was even sold by companies like Datel.
speculawyer said:
Um, that's what a decently-scalable engine *is*, it allows you to turn off those things. You'd populate levels with fewer, lower-poly objects, you'll make them so they are static rather than obeying physics, and you'll turn off the netcode. You'd still be running the same engine.
velvet_nitemare
Member
phisheep said:
There you go.
Rush2thestart
Member
speculawyer said:
...
An engine is the groundwork that you use to build your game around.
They are the same engines. There have been press-releases saying the same things.
The graphics are just scaled down for the games because they're on weaker platforms.
Cromat said:
The wii's appeal over the HD consoles is not limited to motion controls. The success the wii was built on was offering different values to that of the PS3/360. These value include: easy to pick up, arcade like gameplay; local multiplayer; and motion controls. Although SSBB does not use motion controls it very strong utilizes the other values I mentioned in its design. I`m not very familiar with monster hunter but i have heard that it became very popular in Japan on the PSP due in part to its local multiplayer.
Riou said:
... Values? Those are not values. That's marketing. The Wii is marketed as a system which offers these things.
These are consoles, not ideologies. It's about entertainment. The only place where it is regarded like politics or sports is the internet, by a very narrow group of people.
SSBB does not use motion controls because it doesn't fit with its design. Monster Hunter not having some sort of motion or pointer controls is just silly.
They are both games that fly in the face of the Wii's flagship feature, and they are still loved because games of that kind are scarce.
Fuzzy said:
Exactly.
Cromat said:
Just speaking personally, I want more RE4 Wii type games. The Dead Space game you described would not qualify, so I wouldn't want it. Dead Space was just used for an example as it was supposedly an RE4 type game, so I got excited about another RE4 type game that could be using RE4 Wii controls. That didn't happen, so meh. It's not "Dead Space" that I want but rather more RE4 Wii type games.
jett said:
First two months even.
Dragona Akehi
Retired
Sho_Nuff82 said:
While I really don't want to get into this debate, I will say that I am pretty excited for RE5: Saggle Edition, even if using a Sixaxis for the movement is a less than elegant solution. (They better allow for me to move around with the right hand part of the Sixaxis though.)
Much cheaper than getting a gaming rig together and then hoping someone patches in Wiimote support.
yurinka
Member
The original PSP sold loads because weren't "fucking shit and ugly as sin" and because unlike Chinatown Wars they had the same big GTA experience, in terms of artstyle, camera, controls, etc.Sipowicz said:
I think mainly yes, but it's pretty clear a lot of Wii / DS people mainly/only buys Nintendo games. Brawl includes the most popular Nintendo characters, and also popular characters from other IPs, and unlike SF4 or Tekken 6 it doesn't have the main IPs of the genre as competition for its platform.Riou said:
Version 3.0
Member
Fuzzy said:
Although I've always bought every console with the slightest justification, most people (or households) just buy one. They make that choice for various reasons, maybe just on the strength of a game or two--in this case, probably Wii Sports, Wii Fit, or a Mario game. Once they have that one console, is it really so much to ask for a solid game library across all genres, from the most successful console in history?
I, for one, don't understand the uber-defensive behavior of the other side of this view. I'm not asking (although I know some are) for the big 360/PS3 hits to have been exclusive to the Wii--I've enjoyed them and have few complaints. But I am asking for some decent effort on the Wii. I've had just a few tastes of great gameplay that's impossible on any other system at present, and I want more. It really isn't so much to ask. 3rd parties have their collective heads up their collective asses, and it's not only to their detriment, it's also to ours. That's worth some bitching.
Version 3.0
Member
Dragona Akehi said:
I'm not that excited for RE5's re-release, since I didn't enjoy it all that much, but I am excited about the PS3's motion controller. I really hope they refine the controller(s), though, because as it stands now, it seems awkward. Still, maybe this aftermarket add-on will finally garner some of the quality game support for pointer/motion controls that the best-selling console ever hasn't been able to get. As pathetic as that is, I'll still take it gladly.
yurinka said:
the only things they had over chinatown wars were the viewpoint and the voiceacting, and like I said I enjoy the top down viewpoint
the streets were barren, the characters all looked like they had downs and the the storries/characters/missions were fucking horrendous. like low budget half-assed copied of GTA3 or Vice City from a different team (which is what they essentially were)
chinatown wars was fresh, innovative, jam packed with stuff to do and detail and it looked fantastic. one of the best GTA games ever and much more of a "big experience" than the shitty PSP spinoffs
Riou said:
What you said is that SSBB somehow incorporates the 'values' that the Wii stands for, which makes it okay for it not to have motion controls, which is the most prominent feature of the Wii. I argued that the Wii doesn't stand for anything. It's a product, which was marketed a certain way.
I don't care that SSBB or NSMB don't have motion controls. I'm just saying that it's contradictory to say people want 'core' (or whatever you want to call it) games on the Wii because they want to play them with motion controls, when games like SSBB and Monster Hunter 3 don't have motion controls and still get recieved and sell very well.
Leondexter said:
You can ask for it, but you are not guranteed to get it. I agree that ignoring the Wii is not a smart move by developers. But at this point, if you don't get the entertainment you want out of the Wii, get another system instead of complaining about it.
I'm also sure that the vast majority of Wii owners are Wii-only owners and that they are perfectly satisfied with it. The Wii has many good games. It's the Wii owners/supporters on this forum who are not satisfied.
Dragona Akehi
Retired
Leondexter said:
I haven't played RE5 at all, because I liked RE4 Wii's controls so much. Hence, my original plan was to get the PC version and hope someone patched in Wiimote support.
Eteric Rice
Member
This was my position as well. I was ready to buy it, but I just can't justify $50 for a rail shooter.
If it had played like RE4 or the original Dead Space, I would have bought it.
Cromat said:
I would agree with you if you said that the Wii (or any console) doesn't represent much when it launches but as time goes by that changes. Over time a console get defined by the its games. This happened to shooters on the XBOX, kids games on the Gamecube, and etc.
When people say, "I only take out my Wii when people come over", they recognize the local multiplayer value (or maybe priorities if you think 'values' is too politically loaded) of the Wii. I would argue that this local multiplayer value (and others values as well) was something Nintendo attached on to the Wii through the games they released on it. Opiate mentioned earlier that Nintendo multiplayer games tend to have a certain amount of randomness injected into them to accommodate players of different skill levels playing together. I would add that this randomness is feature indicative of local multiplayer because in online multiplayer game designers can simply use matchmaking software to allow you to play with others with similar skill levels.
Essentially Nintendo has given the Wii certain attributes through the games they release of it. Part of why SSBB was successful on the Wii is because SSBB at least to some extent fit those attributes. I felt NSMB Wii match these values really well (as well as being an excellent game) hence epic sales.
Version 3.0
Member
Dragona Akehi said:
That's some serious devotion to the (admittedly excellent) pointer control scheme. Good for you. I don't not recommend RE5--it's good, just not nearly as good as 4--but I'm hesitant to pay full price for another version.
Just for the record, when I say I think 3rd parties should be making more high quality, relatively bigger budget Wii games, I do not mean M rated games.
I'm never going to argue that the Wii will sell big budget, violent games better than the HD platforms. It simply won't.
The problem for Nintendo is that they are pretty much no high quality devs out there working on those types of games anymore. Something tells me that'll change in the next 10 years when these people grow up, start to have kids and actually want to make things their kids can play. See: Robert Rodriguez syndrome. Hopefully, they're more successful than Rodriguez was, though.
I'm never going to argue that the Wii will sell big budget, violent games better than the HD platforms. It simply won't.
The problem for Nintendo is that they are pretty much no high quality devs out there working on those types of games anymore. Something tells me that'll change in the next 10 years when these people grow up, start to have kids and actually want to make things their kids can play. See: Robert Rodriguez syndrome. Hopefully, they're more successful than Rodriguez was, though.
We only have one company to blame for that, Nintendo. It's Nintendo's responsibility to provide the people who bought the Wii with the software they want. They have two ways of doing this: securing third party support in order to release those games or doing it itself. Nintendo has failed in both cases for the most part. You want to bitch? Do it to Nintendo.Leondexter said:
Are you saying he's wrong? Major third-party support started leaving Nintendo at the end of the SNES. You can blame that on Sony and the more favourable environment they provided with the PS1 but you can also blame Nintendo for ignoring third party concerns and just doing what was better for itself.Firestorm said:
Version 3.0
Member
Fuzzy said:
That's completely unrealistic, nothing more than a cop-out. Nintendo is partly to blame, yes, but it's by far the smaller portion. I have my gripes with Nintendo, and that certainly includes their relationships with 3rd parties. They're definitely lacking compared to Sony and Microsoft's. But nevertheless, Nintendo is not responsible for every other company's game lineup. Nearly every company out there develops for the Wii. The quality of that development is beyond Nintendo's control.
There's some kind of a fallacy going on here. I'm not going to deny that people say they want their "core" Wii games with cool new controls - I'll just give you that. But the problem is where you assume the only reason they would ever want to buy and play a Wii game is if it has super sweet motion/pointing/etc.Cromat said:
If a game is good, you like it and buy it and play it. Is this hard to understand?
I'm also not going to deny that, say, SSBB or MH3 would be "better off" on a different platform, in the sense that they would gain something while losing almost nothing (well, I guess it depends on how much you like the CC Pro <_<). I completely concede that point. And, so what? 90% of all games released ever would have been "better off" on something else that was out at the time. That's missed potential, yes, but that doesn't change whether they're good in and of their own merits.
Some people say they only have Wiis because they wanted great motion control, and it's up to you whether or not you believe them, but you can't call them dishonest just because they like a Wii game which doesn't use any motion. Those don't satisfy their primary reason of purchase, but presumably they still like good games.
Fuzzy said:
If you want to say that Nintendo can't be assed to give the kind of development support/marketing/monetary incentive as Sony/MS, because they're satisfied with their sales as is, that's one thing; but to say they're intentionally sabotaging third parties for their own good is some tinfoil hat insanity. If they cared that much, they could just lock third parties out of their consoles altogether. And I'm sure we have things like that Iwata DQX team pic because Nintendo just loathes big third-party releases on their consoles so much. I mean, I don't even know what to say here that shouldn't already be completely obvious.
That's exactly what I'm saying. Nintendo is pretty happy with the status quo on the Wii and really has no incentive in improving those third party relationships. What does it really benefit them in having those big titles coming to the Wii? Are they going to sell more HW leading to them selling more of its own SW? I really doubt the investment it would take would be worth it for them.ZAK said: